Matt Forney
Spread the Word!

Star Trek: The Next Generation and the Failure of Science Fiction


Several months ago, in one of my (usually) ill-fated attempts to understand the tastes of ordinary fuckin’ people, I started watching Star Trek: The Next Generation. I finished it a few weeks ago. I went into it almost totally blind, having never watched any Star Trek TV episodes or movies in my life aside from part of the 2009 reboot (which nearly made me catatonic with its awful action scenes) and Star Trek: First Contact (which gave me nightmares when my parents dragged me to it as a kid). I have vague memories of Next Generation and Voyager episodes from when I was a kid, but that’s it.

I must have been born without the basement dweller gene, because I’ve never had any interest in science fiction or fantasy.

I’ve played sci-fi themed video games like Halo and Deus Ex, but that’s it. When it comes to sci-fi, the only writer I’ll tolerate is Philip K. Dick and movies based off his works (Blade Runner, Total Recall etc.). Every time I’ve attempted to read Heinlein, Herbert, Asimov, Farmer or any of the other “great” sci-fi writers, my eyes glaze over and my brain tunes out. The character development is weak, the plots are hackneyed, and when you strip away the sci-fi element, there’s pretty much nothing left of the book. I assume that there are better sci-fi writers out there, but I’m guessing that I’m disqualified from reading them since I’ve actually put my penis inside a woman.

Star Trek: The Next Generation is a good TV show, but it’s good in spite of the sci-fi element, not because of it. Much like how George Lucas, that other nerd messiah, had no idea what made the original Star Wars movies good, Gene Roddenberry had no idea what made Star Trek good. It’s a testament to the show’s writers and actors that they managed to make an entertaining show despite all the roadblocks that Roddenberry shoved in their path. And frankly, there’s nothing about Star Trek that justifies all the fanboy idiocy surrounding it.

Revenge (Fantasies) of the Nerds

Star Trek makes a lot more sense when you realize that Gene Roddenberry probably had his face bashed in every day after school when he was a teenager. The Next Generation, particularly in its first two seasons, has a childish “FUCK YOU, DAD!” mentality that only the most emotionally stunted manbabies could take seriously. You can almost imagine Roddenberry hunched over his desk in a Xanadu-like mansion muttering to himself: “Stupid bigoted right-wing fascists, I’ll show THEM!”

Starfleet and the Federation in general are a nerd’s wet dream. There are no jocks or bimbos aboard the Enterprise; every crew member from Captain Picard down to the lowliest ensign is a citizen-philosopher. Their hobbies consist exclusively of high-minded pursuits like staging Shakespeare plays, mastering the violin and playing space chess. Everyone is polite and never gets into fights. Money is obsolete and replicators can provide anything that you need. Starfleet and the Federation themselves are never depicted as anything less than saintly; Roddenberry originally created them as stand-ins for the United Nations. You can see why this vision of the future would appeal to a certain type of social misfit.

If you want a vision of the nerd future, imagine being forced to listen to John Lennon’s “Imagine” on a infinite loop forever.

Nerds cling to a bizarre mix of Nietzschean slave morality (believing that their oppression at the hands of the evil jocks and sluts makes them superior) and a childlike, Christian-esque faith that their enemies will get “what’s coming to them.” It’s a fantasy: the reality is that with few exceptions, the “popular kids” in high school end up becoming the most successful adults while losers stay losers. Most nerds, rather than develop the skills they need to turn their lives around, would rather retreat into self-pleasuring fantasy worlds in which their lack of charisma and peculiar obsessions are assets rather than liabilities. Trek fandom is basically a poor man’s narcissism.

Not only that, The Next Generation’s vision of the future shows just how shallow and unimaginative Roddenberry was. To be frank, this is a problem that leftists have in general, but Star Trek places their myopia front and center. Any honest student of history will see that humans haven’t really advanced at all; we may have cleaner streets and better technology, but deep down, we’re still the same hairless apes that were stabbing and raping each other in the Stone Age. The idea that the next 300 years are going to fundamentally alter a human nature that hasn’t changed in the past few millennia is ludicrous. Also, I can guarantee you that if we were to somehow develop replicator technology, our overlords would either find a way to use it to solidify their control, or people would just find another excuse to rob and kill each other.

Not to mention that like all Marxists, Gene Roddenberry was a revolting hypocrite, as shown by how he swindled Alexander Courage out of royalties for the theme music to the original Star Trek.

To the show’s credit, The Next Generation started criticizing Roddenberry’s ideas in later seasons with episodes like “Journey’s End” and “Preemptive Strike.” Also, Davis Aurini recommended that I watch Deep Space Nine afterwards, which basically takes a sledgehammer to Star Trek’s techno-communist ideology, on top of being just a plain better show. Ultimately though, I agree with William Shatner: you Trekkies need to get a life.

Prime Stupidity

No single element of Star Trek illustrates Gene Roddenberry’s infinitely limited mind better than the Prime Directive. You see, “Starfleet is not a military organization” (despite the fact that they fly around in heavily armed starships and have a commission-based chain of command), they’re a peacekeeping organization. And the highest principle of Starfleet is not interfering in the affairs of other peoples. It’s not defending Federation citizens from threats, nor is it protecting the innocent and needy, it’s non-interference.

Only the most retarded of nerds could possibly think that the Prime Directive is a good idea.

Inflexible rules based on half-absorbed principles are the hallmark of an autistic mind. Any country or entity that adopted a policy like the Prime Directive would get invaded, destroyed, and/or exploited by its enemies in record time. Indeed, the first season of The Next Generation shows precisely why the Prime Directive is stupid; it leads to the Enterprise getting tooled by every civilization they encounter. Whether it’s Tasha Yar getting kidnapped by African tribals in “Code of Honor,” Wesley Crusher being sentenced to death for trampling a flower bed in “Justice,” or Riker being forced to humiliate himself to appease the Amazonians in “Angel One,” all the Prime Directive seems to accomplish is turning simple problems into big ones. (As an aside, the scene in “Angel One” where Riker gets “seduced” by the Amazonians’ leader ranks as one of the most cringeworthy things ever recorded on film.)

This all would bother me less if The Next Generation didn’t contradict the reasoning behind the Prime Directive in the very first season. In the season finale “The Neutral Zone,” the Enterprise thaws out a group of cryogenically frozen humans from centuries in the past, before replicator technology was developed and people were still the same venal bastards they are today. One of them later uses the ship’s comm system to pester Picard, and when he chastises the guy, he asks why the Enterprise doesn’t have a lock on the communicators. Picard’s response is that humans of his era have enough self-control to not whale on the comm system every time they get a boo-boo.

So basically, if humans have that much self-control in the future, why is the Prime Directive even necessary? You’re telling me that in this supposedly enlightened galaxy, Starfleet captains can’t be trusted to not incinerate every pre-atomic civilization that annoys them? A reasonable policy would allow individuals to handle alien contact on a case-by-case basis, not impose some idiotic, inflexible law that leads to Starfleet personnel being abused by the aliens that the Prime Directive is supposedly protecting.

Again, I’ll give credit to the later seasons of The Next Generation, as they cleverly criticize the Prime Directive (see: “Who Watches the Watchers?” and “Homeward“). But even still, this is yet another example of Star Trek succeeding in spite of Roddenberry, not because of him. Imagine if George Lucas had died in the early nineties like Roddenberry did; the Star Wars prequels might have actually been good.

Politics vs. Plot

The Next Generation is a prime example of what happens when politics are prioritized over storytelling. While Rick Berman and his crew did a stellar job of cleaning up the pile of turds that Roddenberry shat out for them, it’s still obvious that the show was developed not to be entertaining but to induce warm, politically correct fuzzies in its creator. Beyond Roddenberry’s ridiculous prohibition on conflict between the main characters (that was thankfully relaxed when Berman took over), half the characters themselves have no reason to exist aside from filling quotas.

Take Geordi La Forge. He serves virtually no purpose in the first season aside from checking off the ethnic diversity and cripple sections of the PC quota: “Oooh, a blind black man!” Deanna Troi was similarly tossed in to appeal to the touchy-feely, New Age female demographic, with Marina Sirtis’ cleavage a nice two-fer to rope in the virginal Trekkies. Tasha Yar was inserted to appeal to closeted lesbians. Beverly Crusher was made into a single mother to attract the slut demographic. Don’t get me started on Wesley.

The Trekkies, idiots that they are, don’t realize that it was the tyrannical fist of their idol Roddenberry that made the first season (and about half of the second season) of The Next Generation unwatchable. Wil Wheaton may whine about the “racism” of “Code of Honor” or the “misogyny” of “Angel One,” but the real reason these episodes are bad is because Roddenberry’s guidelines made character development impossible. Characters are what make for good stories: their growth and development, their interactions and conflicts with others, their flaws and virtues. By depicting the Enterprise’s crew as morally superior ÜbermenschenThe Next Generation became a left-wing version of Atlas Shrugged.

The only thing left for the writers to do was Alien Encounter of the Week, with “aliens” that all looked like humans with sandpaper glued to their foreheads.

The best episodes of The Next Generation are the ones that minimize the sci-fi elements completely or otherwise use them as a MacGuffin to develop the characters. Take “Galaxy’s Child,” where Geordi La Forge is forced to reconcile the real Dr. Leah Brahms with the fantasy he created. Or “Frame of Mind,” where Riker’s grip on reality is shaken as he deals with life inside an insane asylum. “The First Duty,” where Wesley Crusher is torn between his oath to Starfleet and his loyalty to his friends. “The Perfect Mate,” where Picard is seduced by a woman with impeccable feminine charms. Even the show’s most popular action-oriented episodes follow this principle. The central conflict of “The Best of Both Worlds,” for example, isn’t Picard’s assimilation by the Borg, it’s about Riker coming to terms with his lack of ambition and dealing with responsibility that has been thrust on him.

Any story that doesn’t place character development first and foremost is a bad story, regardless of genre.

Overall, I’d say that despite the infantile philosophy guiding it, Star Trek: The Next Generation is worth watching, or at least its later seasons are. Again, I don’t know much about the other Star Trek shows/movies, and I dislike sci-fi as a rule, but there you go.

Click here to buy Star Trek: The Next Generation — The Complete Series.

Read Next: Matt Forney’s Podcast Extravaganza, Episode 27: Where No Man Has Gone Before

  • Great breakdown. The acting in those early episodes is really wooden too – but it seems like a choice that comes naturally out of the “humans are perfect now” character choice. Perfect people apparently stand their and deliver dialogue rather than emotionally involving themselves through movement.

    Aurini is right about Deep Space Nine. Straight from the pilot episode crew members are wanting to kill each other. The entire show takes place on basically the Star Trek equivilent of the Star Wars Cantina scene, and just craps all over that “we can all get along” philosophical bs. Humanity might be united, but all these different alien species have different agendas and interests and none of them are enlightened in DS9. Worth a watch.

    Also, Into Darkness is pretty good, and opens with them violating the Prime Directive.

  • I had good memories of TNG from my childhood, but with the advent of Netflix, I found I had to skip right to the 3rd season because the first two are just God-awful. All I can see are the cheap sets, costumes, bad make-up, and horrible dialogue. Aside from a few episodes (“Heart of Glory,” the first “Klingon” episode from season 1 comes to mind) they’re just not worth sitting through.

    And in terms of storylines and character development, Deep Space Nine and even Voyager are the far better series.

  • who the hell watches 7 seasons of a show they don’t like? either you have no life or you like star trek. this article should be titled “i hate that i like start trek”

  • Probably the most surprising review of TNG I’ve ever read.

    I didn’t expect you to say it was watchable.

    Your perspective is very valuable to someone like myself, whose father essentially raised his sons watching this crap. In my adult years, my favorite character of all the series turned out to be Quark, who while being a coward, is the most believable character in any star trek-based episode ever.

  • The only thing left for the writers to do was Alien Encounter of the Week, with “aliens” that all looked like humans with sandpaper glued to their foreheads.

    I laughed so hard a pissed myself.

  • What kills me about Star Trek, is how they took an amazing premise and basically ruined it for all other writers. Exploring the universe in a military-equipped scientific exploration vessel? Sign me the fuck up. Let’s go meet some aliens who control their population by eating their babies, or some uploaded digital aliens who exist in a state of pure hedonism, or auto-wars from a war that happened millenia ago, or something else that fundamentally challenges the human condition.

    Oh, what’s that? Every alien will be a shallow stereotype of some political philosophy with a rubber forehead? And humans and aliens can interbreed? Thanks, assholes.

    You know, they didn’t have to show the aliens and portray them with human actors. Maybe the aliens don’t have viewscreens. Even more importantly, the aliens could still *act* alien, even if we used human actors to depict them… but nope. Everyone’s bipedal, 6-feet tall, and live by stereotypes, not philosophies.

    And because Star Trek did it, anything else (even if it’s done better) will come across as derivative. Doctor Who is just as bad.

  • I’m confused by this use of Mr Forney’s time.

  • Great analysis. I pretty much grew up on Star Trek, but trying to watch it now at 40, I don’t see it the same way. I guess in those days, there weren’t any other sci-fi options, so Star Trek was it. I was in the Navy when TNG ended. There was a later episode (I think in the last season; couldn’t watch it reliably in the pre-DVR days when I was underway a lot) where Crusher and Troi both decided to get bridge watch qualified. That one was interesting.

    Not all sci-fi is like that. Firefly seems to have a libertarian flair to it, complete with the true human condition even though the violence and villians were comic book quality.Too bad that only lasted one season. Vox Day is doing some good things with sci-fi in his Castilia House publishing company. I’ve read a few of their books, and all so far have been great.

  • Aaron

    The best episodes: Masks, Tapestry, Chain of Command, and The Inner Light

    But yes, you’re right TNG is half garbage and kids shouldn’t be watching utopian junkfood. Each race is a one note character with the humans specializing in being agreeably bland. Say what you will about the Klingons and Ferengi as two dimensional at least brought a little life to the screen. Kids may take some interest in TNG entirely for the occasional forays into military action adventure, won’t fully appreciate the more subtle classic sci fi or character driven episodes, and will become tragically misinformed about people along the way.

  • Aaron

    OTOH another thing to put in the pro-TNG column, it laid the groundwork for this guy:

  • AbelardLindsey

    Nice take down of the Star Trek franchise. I have seen very few episodes of any of the Star Trek shows, but have seen most of the movies. What I have seen has not motivated me to watch any more of it. I especially think the “Trekkie” scene is quite silly. I saw an episode of “CSI” that does a take down of the whole Trekkie scene.

  • j

    Excellent analysis – smart,but with just enough coarse language to keep a lowlife like me engaged.

    Wesley Crusher – My suspicion was that he was supposed to attract a young female viewership. Probably just picked up the hard-to-get pedophile demographic.

    There is something about Will Wheaton that make me want to shove his face into a toilet. Or push him into a locker. He is the living embodiment of the Dawson’s Creek Crying-face.

  • Not sure what Wesley Crusher was supposed to attract. I was 13 when TNG first premiered, so for me and some of my friends, it was kind of cool to have a character around our age on the ship.

    I read one of Wil Wheaton’s books about two years ago (Just A Geek), and followed his blog and social media accounts for a while. Then I realized I really can’t stand him and unsubscribed from all of them.

  • Kim

    Benevolent, classy communism. Pass.

    You are right, though, about Deep Space Nine. If someone must watch Star Trek, that’s the one to spend the time on.

  • TOS_only

    What you said is true. But unfortunately you cauld not avoid catestrophic failure in claiming Next Generation is Star Trek. Actually, only the Original Series (the one with Kirk and Spock) is the sole true Star Trek. The rest is crap. Probably you are too young to even know about the Original Series.

    About the rest of science fiction, there are so many authors and so many genres you are laughable if you claim the failure of the science fiction without ever having really tried it. No, I do not believe you read Asimov.

    Spoiled youngsters probably are not anymore able to appreciate old things, because they are not shining and immediate. Try some more recent writer, like Crichton, he was good and you should understand it.

  • TK

    Your “great” sci-fi writer list starts with Heinlein. His most famous book is probably Starship Troopers…. and you are telling me that when you read it your eyes glaze over because there is no character development ? That shows your character when you binge watch tv series and play video games yet unable to finish a top-10 book within its genre.

    Also, I’ve never had sex.

    [CensorBot sez: You are so deprived.]

  • Brad

    Sci-fi is for HBD faggots.

  • The Other Jim

    Good commentary. The original Star Trek was good fun because it was usually clear who the good guys and the bad guys were. Very little preening moral equivalency seen in the Next Generation and the rest. More importantly, the cast centered around Capt. James Kirk, an alpha-male with serious game. Hell, even some of his opponents had game like Khan.

    As for The Next Generation, just wretched. Most of the crew were metrosexual Europeans or pitiful excuses for Americans, both male and female, and it was rife with Socialist memes. Really trite stuff that carried on to the other series.

    Most science fiction(and fantasy) is wretched with an occasional gem found here and there. Blade Runner comes foremost to mind, but then again, it was far closer in style and substance to a classic Film Noir film, just set in the future. Some other films from the Sci Fi/Fantasy genre are worth it-The Road Warrior, Predator, Conan the Barbarian(w/ Arnold), and John Boorman’s Excalibur but that’s really about it. Film Noir, Westerns, and action films are the only suitable diet of movies to watch for guys. Everything else is just chick porn.

  • I’ve never made love to a woman.

    [CensorBot sez: We can tell.]

  • The other other Pat.

    I agree that Sci-fi has it’s SJW’s that want certain messages spread, for the greater good, like Roddenberry did in the first couple of seasons. However there are writers out there that do write really good stories and as a bonus the stories are sci-fi. If you want to read good sci-fi, try Larry Corriea, John Ringo, David Weber, Michael Williamson to start with. Or look at the some of the authors that Baen publishes and start there, as Baen has a library of free books for downloading.

  • May I recommend Battlestar Galactica as a remedy?

  • Raptor Jesus

    So you don’t like sci-fi, then you watch seasons of an iconic “sci-fi” series and you don’t like it… It’s a mystery. It’s a mystery why I’m claiming you didn’t like Star Trek even though you specifically said in the post that you liked it, you just didn’t like certain aspects of it. I must be reel dum.

    [CensorBot sez: Reading comprehension. Try it.]

  • ConantheContrarian

    As I have aged and changed in my philosophy of life, I find it difficult to watch or read science fiction. It doesn’t portray human nature accurately. Even Dune was absurd with all those feminine but ass-kicking bene gesserits. However, I enjoyed Firefly/Serenity.

  • lxc

    Most of the best science fiction gets classed as literary fiction – 1984, Brave New World, Slaughterhouse-Five, The Handmaid’s Tale, etc. Even the libertarian bible – Atlas Shrugged, is essentially science fiction. The genre is so consistently linked with nerds, basement dwellers and what is generously referred to as “unobtrusive” prose such as that produced by Isaac Asimov, that when good sci fi comes around no one wants to call it science fiction (because only nerds read that shit).

    The best sci fi television right now is Black Mirror, written by Charlie Brooker. There’s nothing fluffy or utopian about it, and it is definitely worth tracking down even for non sci-fi fans.

    I would also posit that most contemporary (and classic) sci fi writers have a libertarian bent (which doesn’t make most of them less immature or ridiculous). Heinlein might be boring, but liberal he ain’t.

  • I never got over how I got the shit beaten out of me every day in high school.

    [CensorBot sez: We can tell.]

  • liberatorofbados
  • The BSG reboot was better than TNG. It starts off with devastation and just gets darker and darker. There’s some character development forgetfulness in the show, imo, which is a problem. As the show progresses, the volume of experiences each character goes through are sometimes forgotten when they write in a new crazy event in each episode. My favorite characters were Baltar, Tigh, and Adama, probably in that order. No aliens met, limited ability to find habitable planets, always on the run from a robotic enemy bent on your destruction… it’s a great show. It does not shy away from making the viewer feel the absolute loneliness of deep space with no intelligent life happening upon you randomly, friendly or otherwise. There are no safe harbors for the humans in the fleet, no aliens with new technology and altrustic methods, no shortcuts to finding a place to hide. The show also makes you face a basic truth of human history, and that’s the repetition of humans treating other humans horribly. I would recommend BSG over TNG any day. There’s very little PC correctness in the show, except perhaps a bit of a you-go-girl attitude given to many of the female characters, the typical absurd notion of women being able to stand toe-to-toe with a man in a fistfight.

    I particularly liked how the final episode made it clear that the society that was destroyed in the first episodes was a decadent and self-loving culture. To me, that tied it together well.

  • Silverfox

    It is quite simple really.. This guy is just trying to buffer the hit counter on his blog. And all of you fell for this low life trolling the Trekkers and the Sci-Fi Bashing. Well, bully this Ass Hat. You have shared what you don’t like… Are you bold enough to share what you do like? Or are you afraid to be called a Brony in public? Because as we all know, anyone who dislikes nerd shit is secretly a nerd.

    [CensorBot sez: Go play with your Kirk dolls.]

  • Will S.

    The best Star Trek series remains Deep Space Nine, mostly because it came after Roddenberry’s death, and without Majel Barrett Roddenberry’s input, mostly, due to Rick Berman being in charge, and they were able to be less humanist / optimist and more realist / pessimist, and also because they borrowed heavily, if not swiped, many elements of Babylon Five, I’ve been given to understand (I’ve not watched B5, except the pilot).

    Unfortunately, Voyager sucked, because they decided to turn it into a clone of Next Generation; it had promise and potential, but they ruined it.

    I never bothered with that prequel series with the guy from Quantum Leap. No thanks.

  • Grizzly

    “Gene Roddenberry probably had his face bashed in every day after school when he was a teenager”

    Maybe. But he DID fly 89 combat missions in WWII over the Pacific, was a commercial airline pilot, and was in the LAPD for 7 years. Have you done anything comparable?

    Gene Roddenberry actually had very little to do with The Next Generation, but was the main man behind the original series. The original series was full of hot young chicks in tight skimpy clothes, and all of the chicks on board the Enterprise wore miniskirts that went about 2 inches below their butts.

  • Pingback: Victoria Day Mini-Linkfest | Patriactionary()

  • Anthony

    TOS-only and The Other Jim are right – the original series was *way* better than TNG. I can *still* watch Star Trek episodes, but I couldn’t stick with TNG when it started, even though I was watching Star Trek reruns almost daily at the time.

    In Star Trek, the “Prime Directive” is treated like any other stupid headquarters rule – they pay lip service to it, and violate it whenever it’s the right thing to do. Kirk is a total badass, and gets laid more per episode than most Trekkies do in a year. Spock is actually pretty badass, too. (And while Scotty’s character is not drawn that much that way, the actor who played him, James Doohan, was pretty badass. Took part in D-Day, got his finger shot off.) The characters are mostly cartoons, but there are real conflicts, with definite good guys and bad guys. And the Klingons are bad guys. The PC-ness is a lot more tolerable, since it’s basically “look – black and white and Asian (and Jews disguised as Vulcans) people can all work together without it being an issue”, rather than the “all cultures are valuable and there is no real right or wrong” crap that became so much more common after 1969.

    The original Star Trek is basically a combination Western and police drama set on weird planets with green babes for Kirk to fuckdecoration.

  • Nutup or Shutup

    The problem with science fiction is that science fiction writers focuses way too much on wowing the reader with fantastic subjects and ideas with a basis in the real world. The more scientifically accurate science fiction is, the less well written it will be. Mainstream science fiction is all about factual spectacle. Being in awe of the possible.

    In contrast, Philip K Dick’s writing was about how weird and amazing things have been socially normalized in the lives of everyday people in alternative or future realities. There is very little spectacle in his books. Also he did not try to make his fantastic stuff seem factual. He wrote novels that were about exotic normalcy, and not factual spectacle.

    Also if you like Philip K. Dick, you will like Alfred Bester too. Bester influenced a lot of Dick’s writing style and themes. However, Dick is the better writer of the two.

  • Gian Paolo Colonna

    I’d say go for Timothy Zahn or James Luceno. The Thrawn trilogy is a good place to start. A lot of the Star Wars EU has great political and social insights that poke fun at the setup Lucas made. Many games like Knights of the Old Republic I and II, SWTOR, and the Tales of the Jedi comics do a great job of good, entertaining, science fiction.

  • After reading this post, I got the bright idea to go back and watch Star Trek: TNG. I was 13 when the show first aired in the ’80’s, and since there was nothing better, I remember being impressed with it.

    About 13 episodes in, my fiancé asked “Just why the hell are we watching this?” She likes some science fiction, like Firefly and Stargate:Universe and Battlestar Galactica, but commented “Star Trek is stupid”.

    I agree. While I was fascinated with the tech in the show when I was 13, I now consider it archaic and obsolete. I’m sure my obsolete iPhone 4 could do a better job than most of their technology. The aliens have all “evolved” to be way too plot specific. And as I think other commenters have pointed out, human creativity in the Star Trek universe seems to be stuck in a time when Gene Roddenberry was in diapers. 400 years have passed, yet they keep going back to Sherlock Holmes and 1930’s private investigators, as well as mid 20th century jazz clubs. So in 400 years, there have been no new stories, no new songs, no nothing?

    Since I love a challenge, I’ll see how much farther I can get. So far, I’m on the Binar episode. You know, the plot specific computer aliens.

  • Pingback: The RTS Future That Never Was: Looking Back At Hostile Waters Antaeus Rising – Reaxxion()

  • cynical realist 7356

    So in 400 years, there have been no new stories, no new songs, no nothing?

    If the PC leftards had their way raping the culture like Roddenberry portrayed, no new works of any worth seems pretty plausible. It already pretty much happened in the Soviet Union.

    Unintended realism, anyone?

  • Good point. When you consider how Hollywood just keeps making the same movies over and over again, that probably becomes unintended realism.

  • Wayne

    recommended that I watch Deep Space Nine afterwards, which basically takes a sledgehammer to Star Trek’s techno-communist ideology, on top of being just a plain better show.

    Talking about PC quota, Captain Benjamin Sisko, affirmative action.

    About Voyager,

    Again, PC quota, empowered strong woman, Captain Kathryn Janeway

  • Tony R.

    While I agree with the assessment that Star Trek suffered badly from a blatant infusion of Marxist utopianism, we also need to understand the circumstances in which it was introduced to American television. When network executives saw the Star Trek pilot, they considered it “too cerebral”. The only way Roddenberry was able to sell the show and get it on the air was describe it to one-dimensional television executives as “Wagon Train to the Stars”, as Westerns were still in vogue at the time and the Space Race was in full swing.

    It has been said that Hollywood only has five plots, and every film they’ve produced for the last century fits one of the five templates. That was true with Star Trek, too. Accordingly, as I’ve gotten older, my interest in television dramas and movies at the cinema has waned.

  • Pingback: Beyond Dungeons and Drag Queens and Toward the Jacquerie | Aryan Skynet()

  • Charles Bolter

    After reading everything that the original article had to say about TNG, I would basically agree…AND disagree too. The part that disagrees w/it is the “trek” in me….the Trekkie, if you will, because I am a sci-fi buff and am particular to Star-Trek out of all of the sci-fi series. I would have to say though that while I also understand too, what the author says or rather dislikes about the star trek so-called “Prime Directive”, but I would also have to disagree with the philosophy or principles behind it. I would have to say, that since TNG, there had been a LOT said and talked about (when you consider and have watched ALL of the other series, including DS9, Voyager, Enterprise and all of the big screen movies. Because after having all of the “collective” knowledge that has been talked about and discussed with and relating to “all that is star-trek, meaning the whole background on Starfleet, the academy, and the United Federation of Planets (not to mention the Prime Directive), all of this has evolved quite a bit and it has come a long way than the days of just mentioning a “directive” here and there, and or one/or two planets that belong or have “membership” in the Federation. I think a lot of what I have learned has come from two main places (reading web sites on-line where you can look up and get actual schematics for different Starfleet ships, to actual definitions and understanding(s) about the Starfleet “charter” or membership and what it means to be part of the Federation. The second place I got much of my knowledge is from watching (and more than once), the while series of DS9. You really learn a lot about Starfleet because for one, Bajor was being considered to become a member of the Federation and it had just become an “unoccupied” planet, meaning that it was formerally ruled by the Cardasians (thing of this as if Germany had actually won and for a time, they would actually be ruler of the entire planet Earth – until they were once again, forced out, peace was restored and individual people couple actually govern themselves once again. And Starfleet were now in-line with the Bajorian people to see to it that the Cardasians didn’t try and take control once again over their planet. Watching this series, I would believe that the author of the above article about TNG, would actually agree w/me (and I think he actually did in a little comment he made about DS9), that he would really endorse/like DS9. And for the one main reason he gave bout any type of television show, regardless of genre, it’s all about character development and stories having to do with each other (and the sci-fi stuff is still great, because in DS9 I believe they balanced both very, very well. But in the end, if you are getting my point, both with what the original author had to say about TNG and what I believe about DS9, Trekkies and non-Trekkies alike have a great sci-fi series to watch in front of them here. And again, this (DS9), is where I learned the most and understood a LOT about what it meant (the whole idea of what Starfleet is, the academy and the United Federation Of Planets). DS9 made me believe that as a whole, I could actually “see” a time in the history of the planet Earth, where such an origination exists, where there is a “world president” and not just one for each country. Where we co-exist with other world and ban together with such a “charter” that’s made up of binding principles and philosophies that don’t just exist on paper, just can actually work in real life “practice”. Hey, kinda sounds like something called a constitution, huh? lol.

  • Wayne

    Newsflash, Captain Kirk is also Kike, screwing Shiksas across Universe.

  • Anonthony

    I can smell your fedora from here.

  • Blah

    I would expect this nonsense from someone who thinks “Return of the Kings” is a decent site and declares “Total Recall” is a good movie. Degenerates like you will be shot.

    > all the Prime Directive seems to accomplish is turning simple problems into big ones

    That’s the point of it dipshit – it’s an antagonist – a rule that must be subverted to do what is right.

    What’s right is hunting every one of you scumbags to extinction.